Is it acceptable for a seller to require the use of a specific title provider?

The idea that a seller can require the use of a specific title provider relates to their right to designate how they want the transaction to be executed, especially if it concerns their own policies or preferences regarding the handling of the title. Sellers often have established relationships with certain title companies that they trust for efficiency, reliability, or cost-effectiveness, which may be rooted in past experiences or existing agreements.

In cases where the seller's requirement is driven by their own policy considerations, it's generally permissible as long as it complies with relevant regulations and the buyer's choice is not unduly restricted. This is important because the seller may feel more comfortable and secure in the transaction if the title provider is one that they have worked with previously.

The other options focus on different scenarios that may not provide the same level of clarity or justification for requiring a specific title provider. For instance, involving an affiliate may bring about conflicts of interest, and while disclosures are essential in transactions, they do not generally empower the seller to mandate the use of a specific provider merely based on timing of disclosure. Licensing also matters in the choice of title providers, but it does not inherently justify the seller's requirement without consideration of their own policy preferences, which stands as a valid reason in this context.